At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.

The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy
Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa.
Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game.
Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa.
Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa.
...[aside]...
Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else.
A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other.
Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.

Nowhere near enough items require attunement for the limitation to matter. And if all items switched to needing attunement, then charisma modifier is too low of a number, it just makes Charisma based casters very potent.

The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.

The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy
Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa.
Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game.
Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa.
Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa.
...[aside]...
Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else.
A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other.
Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

I like the Charisma idea, though need to see it in practice with more items that are coveted. It may give sorcerers a strong advantage depending on how certain items stack up.

I didn't notice any attunement in magic armor, likely because you normally only have one set of armor. weapons, necklaces, rings, and the like you can use/have multiples of, so I guess attunement is an attempt to keep a powerful Mr. T character in check.

At full hit points and still wounded to incapacitation? you are playing 1e.
By virtue of being a player your characters are the protagonists in a heroic fantasy game even at level one
"Wizards and Warriors need abilities with explicit effects for opposite reasons. With the wizard its because you need to create artificial limits on them, they have no natural ones and for the Warrior you need to grant permission to do awesome."

I like the idea of attunement, but I feel it was just added last minute and not very many items use attunement.

I would prefer it most objects required attunement and the DM was given a slider for how much magic they wanted in their compaign, AND the players were aware of this. I know a DM can give and take items as they please, but I feel that setting up player expectation and meeting those expectations is a neccessary part of creating an enjoyable game. If my players expect 4 magic items each by level 10 but I give them 2 each, they will be upset. If they expect 1 magic item each by level 10 and I give them 2 each they will be elated.

When it comes to the Charisma rule, I like the idea of Charisma allowing you to use more magic items, but I don't think players should be penalized for having a low Charisma. I would prefer something like, you can attune X or Cha Mod, whichever is higher.

I think everything needs attunement, to include weapons/armor, so those items in the packet that don't have an attunement requirement should be fixed. I think if it's common though it probably isn't needed for those items, as common to me means fungible goods that were made for resale in mind. That said I like the common sense approach to items and where they can be worn. If I want 3 necklaces I can have them. I can wear 10 rings, however attunement means I can only have 3 (more or less if the experimental rule is used) of those rings active.

The problem I have with multiple abilities being tied to magic items is the limit can get crazy high. The RAW without the experimental rule is you can have 3 attuned. One weapon, one Armor, and something else (in my perfect world where everything requires attunement). It limits the PC Christmas tree. If we use, say Con and Cha, you have the potential to have 10 magical items attuned. Maybe attunement means you unlock the full potential. Picking up a sword and not attuning means it's a +1 sword, but attuned you gain +2d6 fire damage.

Maybe the attunement bonuses could be used for the limit if we get with multiple stats. For example if Efreeti Chain is a +3 magical item (+2 enhancement, +1 for all the other stuff), so you need to have a +3 Con mod to wear and attune to it properly. If you have a +4 Con mod, it means you still have one more point of Con to attune to something else, which will obviously be weaker.

Or, Perhaps in order to not penalize too much for low Cha, if we stay on that route of thinking, is that you can attune 1 + Cha Mod with a minimum of one attuned item. So everyone can have at least one magical item, but those with more Cha can bind their will to more. Yes, this does favor Cha based classes more, but only their potential to wear more magical items, it doesn't mean more magical items will be given out.

To summerize: Everything needs attunement, attunement should be the limiting factor in how many items you can wear/use/have available. The amount you can use should be limited in some way. Cha is a good ability for this, since it is under utilized in most characters cases. If we go with multiple abilities, then different types of items require different abilities, and are limited by that ability (Need +3 Con to use Efreeti Chain as an example).

maybe a compromise?you gain atunement slots at levels 1,11 and 21if you have a charisma modifyer this is subtracted from these numbers.so if you have a charisma modifyer of +3 you get the slots at levels 1,8,18

maybe a compromise?you gain atunement slots at levels 1,11 and 21if you have a charisma modifyer this is subtracted from these numbers.so if you have a charisma modifyer of +3 you get the slots at levels 1,8,18

This is not a great idea, because it means that Charisma is important at some levels but not others. At level 10, the guy with the high Charisma has an extra attunement slot. At level 11, he doesn't.

maybe a compromise?you gain atunement slots at levels 1,11 and 21if you have a charisma modifyer this is subtracted from these numbers.so if you have a charisma modifyer of +3 you get the slots at levels 1,8,18

This is not a great idea, because it means that Charisma is important at some levels but not others. At level 10, the guy with the high Charisma has an extra attunement slot. At level 11, he doesn't.

But that guy felt awesome at level 10. Maybe this is the point. Letting them get something a little earlier makes them feel awesome for a while until everyone else catches up. This makes it fun while still being relatively fair. Someone with high Charisma ALWAYS having more magic items isn't as fair.

I think everything needs attunement, to include weapons/armor, so those items in the packet that don't have an attunement requirement should be fixed.

--

To summerize: Everything needs attunement, attunement should be the limiting factor in how many items you can wear/use/have available. The amount you can use should be limited in some way.

I really see no reason for this. The items set as requiring attunement in the package are generally the most powerful items, as well as charged items. There is a good reason to limit these items, especially the charged items (and I suspect that it it mainly the charged items that attunement is intended for).

The general idea seems to be to put a limit on the massive + items, the very powerful effects and the charged items, but not on the wondrous effects.

What could be gained by setting such a hard limit on every magical item?

maybe a compromise?you gain atunement slots at levels 1,11 and 21if you have a charisma modifyer this is subtracted from these numbers.so if you have a charisma modifyer of +3 you get the slots at levels 1,8,18

This is not a great idea, because it means that Charisma is important at some levels but not others. At level 10, the guy with the high Charisma has an extra attunement slot. At level 11, he doesn't.

But that guy felt awesome at level 10. Maybe this is the point. Letting them get something a little earlier makes them feel awesome for a while until everyone else catches up. This makes it fun while still being relatively fair. Someone with high Charisma ALWAYS having more magic items isn't as fair.

Would you also say that someone with high Constitution ALWAYS having more hit points isn't fair?

maybe a compromise?you gain atunement slots at levels 1,11 and 21if you have a charisma modifyer this is subtracted from these numbers.so if you have a charisma modifyer of +3 you get the slots at levels 1,8,18

This is not a great idea, because it means that Charisma is important at some levels but not others. At level 10, the guy with the high Charisma has an extra attunement slot. At level 11, he doesn't.

But that guy felt awesome at level 10. Maybe this is the point. Letting them get something a little earlier makes them feel awesome for a while until everyone else catches up. This makes it fun while still being relatively fair. Someone with high Charisma ALWAYS having more magic items isn't as fair.

Would you also say that someone with high Constitution ALWAYS having more hit points isn't fair?

No. This is one of the main purposes of Constitution. My point was that giving Charisma a large buff like 'more magic items' might be unfair, while giving it 'One more magic item 15% of the time' would be less unfair.

I'm not saying it is or isn't a good idea, I was just responding to your comment about how it would be important at one level but not the next.

Personally, I like the idea of every magic item needing attunement. I'd make it 2 + 1/4 level attuned items, or Cha mod (min 1) + 1/4 level attuned items if you want to use the experimental rule.

Characters will want to hoard dozens of magic items. That's not going to change. However, if the game limits the number of items that can be worn or used at any given time, it'll significantly speed up combat. The only magic items that should be able to be used without attunement should be Scrolls, Potions, and other exculisvely consumable items like one-time-use magical arrows and bolts.

I wrote up a number of these ideas in another thread - Magic Item Analysis. Feel free to check it out.

What I think is so great about the attunement rules is that I've already seen in this thread alone at least half a dozen variants that I think sound like equally good ways to do things. It's a good idea that has a ton of different ways it can be implemented, based on how the DM and players want to run their game. A+ on that one, WotC.

Personally, I like the idea of every magic item needing attunement. I'd make it 2 + 1/4 level attuned items, or Cha mod (min 1) + 1/4 level attuned items if you want to use the experimental rule.

Characters will want to hoard dozens of magic items. That's not going to change. However, if the game limits the number of items that can be worn or used at any given time, it'll significantly speed up combat. The only magic items that should be able to be used without attunement should be Scrolls, Potions, and other exculisvely consumable items like one-time-use magical arrows and bolts.

I wrote up a number of these ideas in another thread - Magic Item Analysis. Feel free to check it out.

Yeah, all items should require attunement, and you should start with 2-3 attunement slots, then go up as you level maxing out at 7-9 slots.

Then require 24-48 hours of uninterrupted rest and/or relaxation to change attuned items. so a by level attunement chart would look like this:

The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.

The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy
Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa.
Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game.
Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa.
Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa.
...[aside]...
Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else.
A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other.
Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.

Personally, I like the idea of every magic item needing attunement. I'd make it 2 + 1/4 level attuned items, or Cha mod (min 1) + 1/4 level attuned items if you want to use the experimental rule.

Characters will want to hoard dozens of magic items. That's not going to change. However, if the game limits the number of items that can be worn or used at any given time, it'll significantly speed up combat. The only magic items that should be able to be used without attunement should be Scrolls, Potions, and other exculisvely consumable items like one-time-use magical arrows and bolts.

I wrote up a number of these ideas in another thread - Magic Item Analysis. Feel free to check it out.

Yeah, all items should require attunement, and you should start with 2-3 attunement slots, then go up as you level maxing out at 7-9 slots.

Then require 24-48 hours of uninterrupted rest and/or relaxation to change attuned items. so a by level attunement chart would look like this:

I think 8 hours or meditation or relaxation while wearing the item would be enough- one or two full days takes a little too long. I do think that 10 minutes is a bit too short to attune to an item - though I'd allow a feat that allowed characters to attune to items faster (maybe cutting the time in half each time the feat is taken, to a minimum of 15 minutes if you took the feat 5 times).

I do love how you can now wear more than one necklace or ring - it makes sense, honestly. I also like how boots are limited, so character's can't have Boots of Speed, Boots of Springing and Striding, and Winged Boots at the same time. A super-fast character with massive jumps and a flight speed would be terrifying. It actually makes it a tough decision to choose which kinds of boots to wear, provided you're in a high magic world and you've found at least two pairs.

Nowhere near enough items require attunement for the limitation to matter. And if all items switched to needing attunement, then charisma modifier is too low of a number, it just makes Charisma based casters very potent.

Too early in the playtest to worry about this. Remember, this is just the first sample. By the time this goes to print, there will likely be several items that you can attune to, along with guidelines to help a DM create their own.

You could carve the attuned properties up and require different attributes for different items.

The rules also say that you can only have no more than 3 items attuned to a single character at one time. The one that says up to your Charisma bonus is an experimental rule, not a set one. You don't have to use the rule for Charisma bonus should you choose not to. Also, remember that intellegent (especially cursed) items can be jealous, and force a character to give up other attunements, or prevent them from taking place. I can see an intellegent Holy Avenger doing something like this.

Would you also say that someone with high Constitution ALWAYS having more hit points isn't fair?

No. This is one of the main purposes of Constitution. My point was that giving Charisma a large buff like 'more magic items' might be unfair, while giving it 'One more magic item 15% of the time' would be less unfair.

I'm not saying it is or isn't a good idea, I was just responding to your comment about how it would be important at one level but not the next.

It would actually be giving Charisma a main purpose like Constitution has instead of having no main purpose, like it's traditionally had. I would probably make the floor pretty generous, to make it so that every character needs a bunch of charisma, and maybe throw in a feat or something that lets you attune an extra item, but I think it's a great way to make charisma finally do something.

Dwarves invented beer so they could toast to their axes. Dwarves invented axes to kill people and take their beer.
Swanmay Syndrome: Despite the percentages given in the Monster Manual, in reality 100% of groups of swans contain a Swanmay, because otherwise the DM would not have put any swans in the game.

I like attunement, not becase it is a balancing mechanism, but because it a mechanic that supports stories, such stories of discovering the greater magical potential in an item, through slow discovery. For example discovering that nifty +1 sword is a vorpal sword. Also stories of items attuned to certain arch types, dwarf throwing hammer, or holy avenger.

Its about story for me, the attunement mechanic support building stories, not just in the background of an item but also it' s relationship to it' s weilder or wearer.